First Core i3 6100 review

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 27 Oct 2015 at 00:10

Looks a decent little chip but you do need fast RAM to get the best performance:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-intel-core-i3-6100-review

Firejack · 27 Oct 2015 at 13:58

Interesting review. Never noticed the i3-6100 only had 3MB of cache compared to the i3-6300/6320 4MB!

The results of the higher clocked memory has my head in a twist. For so long the Intel chips I've used have benefited from tighter timings then high frequencies for the games I've played.

Built myself a Steam Machine from spare parts the other week. Just waiting for my Steam Controller to arrive to start using it. Really tempted with an upgrade to a i3-6100 + GTX960 4GB though.

chippy08 · 27 Oct 2015 at 18:16

whats the equivalent card for this chips iGPU ?

joeyjojo · 28 Oct 2015 at 10:16

Couldn't believe that memory speed scaling until I read the intro:

We set about benchmarking the new Core i3 using the same principles we used in assessing the Skylake Core i5 and the i7 - we seek to eliminate the GPU as a bottleneck by pairing the CPU with an overclocked Titan X running at 1080p, but we run the games at max settings (albeit with no multi-sampling anti-aliasing in most cases). The role of the CPU is to run game logic and prepare instructions for the GPU - compromising on quality settings would mean fewer elements to draw in any given scene and would not fully test the processor workload.

So they're testing a system in a config that no sensible person would use? How is that useful consumer information?

Would rather see it tested with a low-mid GPU at 1080p, or a mid-high end GPU at 2560x1440 (or more), with some AA in both cases.

As they say, all they're really testing here is "the role of the CPU...to run game logic and prepare instructions for the GPU". Basically they've benchmarked DirectX 11 then?

chippy08 said:
whats the equivalent card for this chips iGPU ?

HD 530 is comparable to an AMD R7 250, among others. http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-review,3107-7.html

DragonQ · 28 Oct 2015 at 10:29

joeyjojo said:
Couldn't believe that memory speed scaling until I read the intro:

So they're testing a system in a config that no sensible person would use? How is that useful consumer information?

Thanks for that, I can't view the article at work. I was wondering why RAM speed made so much difference in this benchmark when traditionally it has made almost no difference.

RavenXXX2 · 28 Oct 2015 at 11:38

Nearly 100 notes for this pos, Pentiums over £60. Joke tbh.

koolpc · 19 Nov 2015 at 13:48

Core i3-6100 3.70GHz (Skylake)

Decent CPU?

What speed ram is best to use?

rickh · 19 Nov 2015 at 14:01

joeyjojo said:
So they're testing a system in a config that no sensible person would use? How is that useful consumer information?

https://youtu.be/3G-7bfPG2dE?t=4m22s

Rroff · 19 Nov 2015 at 14:09

Wow that IPC difference to the FX in the few situations where it really counts...

joeyjojo · 19 Nov 2015 at 16:58

rickh said:
https://youtu.be/3G-7bfPG2dE?t=4m22s

Thanks for that, very interesting. I like his conclusion and mention of bottleneck heirarchy: GPU, then CPU, and consider memory as part of the CPU one.

koolpc · 19 Nov 2015 at 17:02

Is that CPU a good one?

Dave2150 · 19 Nov 2015 at 17:42

Crazy how a dual core CPU still gets the job done in 9/10 games today.

The people getting a 6/8 core CPU for gaming should really pay note to this

koolpc · 19 Nov 2015 at 17:49

But this is not 'stand alone' is it? This is with a dedicated GPU too?

r7slayer · 19 Nov 2015 at 18:57

Dave2150 said:
Crazy how a dual core CPU still gets the job done in 9/10 games today.

The people getting a 6/8 core CPU for gaming should really pay note to this

dual core with hyper threading. So essentially 4 threads.
It's not going to be beating a i5 but in terms of fps probably not far off.

Most games use upto 4 threads where as odd games do make use of more than 4 threads but only a few. I think those people who got 6/8 cores were mainly trying to future proof as if your buying a new rig you want it to last, so buying with future proofing in mind and with out new low level APIs showing more multi threading in games why not invest in more than a cpu offering more than4 threads?

Also AMD equivalent cpu's get the job done too but doesn't mean they're better at the job right?

JonSmith · 21 Nov 2015 at 14:25

There's flaws in those benchmarks. The Ryse and Crysis 3 results are way out of whack.

Dave2150 · 21 Nov 2015 at 16:30

r7slayer said:
Also AMD equivalent cpu's get the job done too but doesn't mean they're better at the job right?

Err, equivalent AMD CPU's get less than half the performance of a Skylake I3 in games. Just look at the benchmarks posted above. I wouldn't call that 'getting the job done'.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 21 Nov 2015 at 16:50

Dave2150 said:
Err, equivalent AMD CPU's get less than half the performance of a Skylake I3 in games. Just look at the benchmarks posted above. I wouldn't call that 'getting the job done'.

No it doesn't. Even the old FX6300,is holding up far better than the SB and IB Core i3 chips of the same vintage and is holding its own against the much later Haswell chips.

Having actually owned the SB and IB Core i3 chips too,with various mates who have the FX6300,its had decent longevity.

Dave2150 · 21 Nov 2015 at 20:47

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
No it doesn't. Even the old FX6300,is holding up far better than the SB and IB Core i3 chips of the same vintage and is holding its own against the much later Haswell chips.

Having actually owned the SB and IB Core i3 chips too,with various mates who have the FX6300,its had decent longevity.

Obviously I'm comparing the Skylake I3's with the older AMD CPU's, there no comparison in performance.

r7slayer · 21 Nov 2015 at 22:06

Dave2150 said:
Obviously I'm comparing the Skylake I3's with the older AMD CPU's, there no comparison in performance.

ohh so i guess your comparing newer intel cpus to older amd dual cores?

Or quad cores as AMD don't currently have any other cpus that offer four threads than their quad cores. Half the performance... seriously...